Metabones update unlocks native Sony focus modes for EF adapters

Updated firmware - that we do not recommend you try until reading our caveats (see 'Update' section below) - allows Sony users to use all their AF modes when shooting Canon EF-mount lenses with Metabones adapters. It does so by emulating a native Sony lens, much like the recent Sigma MC-11 adapter. This update to the Metabones line of Smart Adapters and Speed Boosters enables the use of modes such as continuous Eye-AF and Direct Manual Focus. Updated firmware also brings smoother aperture control to most of Metabones' adapters, which may be compelling to videographers. And though the company doesn't make any claims as to video focusing, if the adapters do truly emulate native E-mount lenses, we'd expect AF functionality during video.

The Metabones is only the second E-mount adapter to offer 'native' lens functionality with adapted lenses, with the Sigma being the first.* However, in practice the Sigma MC-11 has had many issues, too often reverting to contrast-detect AF off-center, and constantly hunting back and forth in minute increments in AF-C.

It's not surprising, then, that Metabones lists a series of caveats and exceptions, most of which reflect the range and diversity of EF lenses that people might use. There are also warnings of increased battery usage and of poor continuous AF performance from lenses that aren't designed to be driven in the pattern required for fast contrast-detection AF. Finally, Metabones mentions potential problems when shooting stopped down, undoubtedly a result of Sony's 'stop-down focusing' that cripples the AF system if you shoot at smaller apertures by depriving the AF system of light, and literally shutting off phase-detection altogether at apertures smaller than F8.

Firmware for the latest adapters can be downloaded from the Metabones website. Owners of Mark I, II or III Smart Adapters and original Speed Boosters will need to return their adapters to the factory, where they will be updated free-of-charge.

UPDATE: We've tried out the new firmware on a Smart Adapter IV paired with a few lenses (Canon 35mm F1.4L II, 70-200 F2.8L II, all Sigma Art primes) on a Sony a7R II. Phase-detect functionality appears to be limited to a very small central region, which means excessive hunting with off-center points, or Lock-on and Eye AF (both in AF-C) for non-central subjects. While AF in video is possible, it's slow with significant hunting. At this point, a7/R II and a6300 owners may find this update largely useless (or even counter-productive), though you can always revert to 'Green' (previous default) mode by de-attaching and re-attaching the adapter with its one function button held down. a7 Mark I and a6000 owners may benefit from the update enabling phase detection in the central area, but we found even this unreliable.

Metabones® has already added fast EF lens autofocus to its Micro Four Thirds Mount Speed Boosters® and Smart Adapters™ last year. With this speedy advantage now extended to E-Mount, EF-Mount lenses are now capable of focusing quickly across the widest variety of mirrorless cameras with trusted Metabones precision and reliability.

The smooth iris feature slows down the movement of the electromagnetic aperture diaphragm so that video footage transitions smoothly when the aperture changes, with reduced tick noise from the lens. The latest Canon and Tamron SP lenses have special support for this feature and Metabones® makes use of it if the lens supports it.

Limitations:

E-Mount "native" autofocus features may not work with all lenses.

"Native" autofocus may be lesser in performance and/or accuracy compared to the original "Green" mode phase-detect autofocus for A6300, A7 Mark II and A7R Mark II.

AF-C and video autofocus may have unsatisfactory AF performance and/or accuracy. This is a limitation inherent in DSLR lenses, which lack the low latency required for making many fine movements in rapid succession during AF-C and video focusing.

Excessive hunting may occur if a small aperture is used with AF-C, video or "Liveview Display Setting Effect" turned on.

The first few autofocus attempts may result in false positives where the camera gives focus confirmation but the subject is not in focus. This issue goes away on its own after a few trials with most lenses.

No support for in-camera correction such as peripheral shading, CA and distortion.

Power consumption may increase compared to the original "Green" mode autofocus. We recommend turning off the "Pre-AF" option to conserve battery power. On A7 series cameras and A6300 the option is on page 3 under the "gear" tab.

Actuations of the electromagnetic aperture diaphragm and/or the focus motor of the lens result in noises which may be picked up by the camera's internal microphone during video recording. Use of an appropriately placed external microphone is required for video work.

The aperture moves in 1/3 stop steps with most Panasonic cameras and 1/8 stop steps with other cameras, which may be noticeable in video recordings. Programmed exposure mode and shutter priority exposure mode should not be used for video. Lenses supporting "smooth iris" smooth out the transition but do not increase iris resolution.

The following lenses have been tested for "native" AF. Refer to Metabones' web site for the most up-to-date list. Lenses equipped with smooth iris support are marked with asterisks. APS-C lenses are not compatible with Speed Booster®.

OSX and Windows versions of the firmware updater are available for download from Metabones' web site. The same download updates Speed Booster® ULTRA, Smart Adapter™ Mark IV, EF to FZ Mount Smart Adapter and all EF Mount to Micro Four Third mount products. Updates to earlier Smart Adapters™ (I, II and III) and the original Speed Booster® are by factory only and are free of charge except for shipping.

*A TechArt adapter was technically the first to offer native lens functionality, but it was so highly unreliable that we never considered it a viable option.

Comments

Any updates on this topic? I am interested in AFC in video mode. Anybody know where I can find more information, been searching but have not found any other forums or reviews. Would appreciate it. I am a A7sII user with One native lens and a ton of Canon Lenses. For run and gun videos I do I can only use the 16-35F4OSS at the moment, I did not like the 24-70 F4 very much and when it was stolen I ended up getting the 16-35 which is better as far as I can tell. Only bummer is no 4k in crop mode.Thanks

I too found that the green mode worked far better on my a6300 with the V0.50 update. I used V0.50 (green mode) extensively this past week with my Canon 24-70 f/2.8 L (Mk I). I was very impressed. Over three days of shooting, I had three instances where the camera had difficulty and hunted. And I had one instance where the adapter just locked up. I had to remove it and reset it to get it to work. While that might seem like a negative aspect, it's far from it. I shot well over 500 photos and had issues with 4, resulting in a 99.2% success factor with an emulated lens.

V0.52 was released by Metabones on 30 June, worth a look at their site to read what they've said. Well done Metabones for listening, more companies should be this responsive. I updated and this evening briefly checked using my A7ii, Metabones IV and 50 STM & 70-200 f4L and the green mode is now default and seems to work nicer. Haven't tried the native emulation / advanced mode at this stage.

Now I wish I hadn't updated so quickly. Experiencing all the problems mentioned, including significant hunting in video. Is it possible to rollback to 0.49? I couldn't find a link to the previous firmware. Thanks.

Is very interesting and I wonder what Metabones did differently. Just 2 weeks ago I got the MC-11 and it works very well with the Canon 17-40 L f/4 on my a7ii. Not as good as the native ones in low contrast AF fields, but close enough. That said, on my old a7 it can't even be called Autofokus. Just hunts like mad.

That is because the MC-11 only does a native mode with Sigma global vision lenses and defaults to adapted AF for other lenses, which the A7 just does old fashioned CDAF, where A7 II uses PDAF only. MB does native emulation with all EF lenses (or at least most).

I am quite happy with my Canon manual FD lenses on my A6000, using an adapter, that is metal, no bone in it, for less than $20. :)

My large collection of nearly 60 FD lenses, with a good portion of L lenses, has not been used since 2001, but now it has a brand new life.I have been experimenting with these lenses for sometime now.I will add some images to my gallery when I'm ready.

I tried it on my A6300 with smart adapter; it was pretty disappointing. I tested a Canon EF-S 18-135 and EF 70-200/4L IS, both are decent in AF-S but can be confused sometimes. Not only is phase-detection limited to the center, AF-C is utterly unusable. Video AF was actually surprisingly okay, pretty smooth but slow to focus. I suggest that users of A6300, A7II and A7R2 go back to green mode for better focus speed and hit rate. This native mode is no match compared to Sigma's MC-11 adapter with Sigma lenses.However I do see this native mode useful for people using previous Sony cameras with no PDAF when using adapters, for this might improve AF performance when using contrast detection only.

Should owners of a non-PD-capable Sony "stay clear", too? Are they at all affected by the issues mentioned? Have there been improvements for them? And how about Micro Four Thirds, which clearly is included in the Metabones press release, too? What do Micro Four Thirds users have to expect (those with and without the phase-detection capable E-M1), and why should they care about that warning?

Should Panasonic owners "steer clear"? Or Olympus owners? (E-M1 is getting faster PDAF.) How about Blackmagic? JVC? Sony AltaCine F5? What if I have an A7SII? The heading is one of negligence and overgeneralization, and totally disregards the smooth iris feature that is new to all aforementioned cameras useful for cinematography. Very little work is done before jumping to the conclusion.

As we understand it, native AF only applies to Sony cameras, not mFT. And as we said, we found performance to go backward on Sony cameras. Didn't try it on the a7S II- but that never had PDAF to begin with, so the a7S II may not have these drawbacks, but it probably won't benefit much either.

Outside of the small central area, even Eye AF on the a7R II reverts to Face Detection (the full face has a box around it, the eye isn't isolated), but with extra hunting compared to Face Detection in 'wide' mode in the 'Green' mode prior to the update. So I'm really failing to see any benefit(s), and a number of disadvantages. Though, of course, you can always shift the adapter back into Green mode even after the firmware update (not sure how to make it default again, or if this kills the 'Advanced' mode).

mFT videographers may see a benefit from smooth iris, but that's it far as we can tell. We haven't had a chance to try the smooth iris yet.

Thank you! (By the way mFT for Panasonic has been running native AF since last July, and E-M1 is getting a PDAF speed boost in this release.)A7SII used to have the slow, steppy CDAF which took seconds to lock in the previous releases, and this release is the first time the non-PDAF cameras get a speed boost. Not the A7RII kind of fast of course, but an order of magnitude faster than v49, or a Sony A-mount lens on Sony's own LA-EA3. I would suggest you to grab an A7SII and compare Green and Advanced mode and see for yourself which one you prefer!

I appreciate that this is very complicated. Different lenses have different ideal step sizes and ranges, so it can't be easy to make a 'one-size-fits-all' adapter for all different types of Sony bodies, and all different types of lenses... Very cool you can do any of this, really.

In short;we still have to buy native,expensive Sony lenses to be able to use sophisticated AF system of Sony.I can't blame them,but beside old Minolta lenses,even their SLT cameras don't have relatively cheap lenses like Nikon 85mm 1.8 G (or Canon counterpart),Canon 100mm 2.0,Nikon 70-300 G,Canon 55-250 STM etc.It would have been really nice,making videos with 85mm at 1.8 or at 300 mm.I know;some people,who have never tried Sony's really cool AF on videos,will say "video=manual focus"...

As an old Pentax user,yes I know they are stabilized.But even third party brands don't have a cheap 85mm 1.8 or 100mm 2.0 (Tamron 85 1.8 is new,not as cheap as Nikon or Canon equivalents and I think there is no Sony mount).I didn't write my post to bash a brand.Actually these are the lenses which I would prefere to be in my bag.I was considering to buy Sony LE-A4 adapter and few A mount lenses.But I couldn't find lenses to convince me that, it is a good idea.Especially because with this adapter,I will be stuck with its own AF ability.

The Canon 85mm f1.8 is a pretty old optic while the Fuji 90mm f2 is probably the sharpest and best performing Fuji lens out there which when considering most Fuji lenses are stellar performers. So if you want quality people will have to pay for it.

Other than the improved advanced mode, the new firmware also brings accurate lens model EXIF, both in green mode and advanced mode. I am really happy that it now show my lens as "EF70-200mm f/4L IS USM" instead of "70-200mm F4 G SSM OSS".

copy: There is no "right" setting, but based on customer feedback most A6300/A7II/A7RII users prefer "Green" mode. Follow the procedure below to configure your adapter to start in "Green" mode. Stick with the default "Advanced" mode if you find lower AF speed and using AF-S acceptable and you want the extra AF features or more robustness with long telephotos and edge/corner AF points.'end copy...argh...can I my two hours of my life back?

Maybe this is crazy talk but, why is all of this useful functionality being provided by a third party and not by sony themselves?

I mean sony has the knowhow and tech to make a metabones-like adapter, except sony could probably do it easier because they don't have to reverse engineer their own stuff. And they probably already have reverse engineered canon stuff before.

Could they legally make a camera whose mount (without any adapter) fits canon lenses, as well as their own? Sort of like how one mount can attach both EF and EF-S lenses?

haha I know, but the thing is, in theory you're buying the buying the system, not just the camera body, and a more flexible system with a giant lens lineup should be more attractive than a system with a more limited lineup.

Maybe the sony lens division is super profitable for them and they should stick to razor+blade strategy... but I had the impression they are much better at making sensors and therefore bodies than lenses.

I've read a few people say they can't go sony because there are holes in the lens lineup and adapted glass just isn't cutting it.

I know it's nothing like the usual business strategy... but if someone made a body tomorrow that had a sony quality sensor, and could fit canon+nikon lenses without any addon, and with full functionality, I'd probably buy that new body tomorrow.

^^ Unfortunately your thinking is more utopian. Its exactly why Canon and NIkon refuse to release their entire mount specs to third party people like Tamron and Sigma which is why many of those lenses face AF issues.

Since Canon doesn't release their mount specs Sony can't really make a 100% working adapter.

One could argue sticking with Canon lenses is a better option for A7x owners. Larger selection, better pricing, more support, and they work on multiple systems. With used (more affordable) copies are more prevalent too. Canon has better professional support and a larger infrastructure (more accessories, better flash support, and so on), so I can see those who sticking with Canon for a main/pro camera and going with an A7Rii for their 'private use' camera.If Canon releases a compettive mirrorless body in the near future switch back and forth would be easy. I am in a similar situation with A mount and E mount. But ironically Canon lenses have better support with E mount bodies than do my A mount screw drive lenses.

For very basic amateur use adapters are fine. For pro use or for really discerning amateurs its a horrible option.

Adapters are problematic very often. My Sony A mount adapter broke when I was shooting with friends in Thailand and because of that 3 lenses I carried couldn't work any longer on my camera. I lost a fairly good amount of photos because one broken adapter ensured 3 of my 4 lenses didn't work !

Lensrentals also have reported very high failure rates with even Metabones adapters. Users of cheaper adapters will probably have much worse results.

Seems like instead of truly mimicking a native Sony lens you get results similar to when you use one of the older Sigma art lenses in E-mount so phase detect works but only in a small central potion of the frame.

Looks like it still works better in the previous mode that mimics an LA-EA3

I guess i'll never get truly decent performance with adapted lenses on my A6000 unless Sony update it to do phase detect with the LA-EA3 (and the metabones by association) which seems unlikely now. The Sigma MC-11 works ok with Sigma lenses on the A6000 but not with Canon lenses as the adapter falls back to the metabones/LA-EA3 method with Canon lenses which the A6000 is not optimised for.

Just checking language / definitions re this potentially intriguing development...following Adam Palmer comment/sso if I update from V0.49 firmware which provides a fairly broad PDAF area for my compliant lenses (is this Green mode , the "old" mode you refer to?) , so as I read it, I can switch between this new Advanced mode which potentially supports Sony native focus modes and my current "old" or green mode ) by mounting adapter and powering as per Metabones method. I own Mk IV and Sony A7ii. Thanks and apologies, but I want to get this right before I try with my kit.

Tried it this evening, indoors, low light and my 50 STM seemed to hunt more than previously, switched back to the old green mode, and it faired better. I will try a few of my other lenses another day and in a range of lighting conditions. and in the meantime....back to the simplicity and elegance of my manual focus lenses.

wow, i thought i was going crazy....same thing happened to me. it would not lock onto focus in low light...hunted forever, and never locked on...sure, other modes now work, but i think another firmware update is needed. going to revert back to previous firmware.

The hunt forever issue seem to be on selective lenses, as I had that issue with the 24-70 2.8 II and 100-400 II. However, the other lenses like the 40 2.8 and 50 1.2. The AF is not far from a Sony Lens. Test environment is 2x 60W at celling with 1x 60W table lamp by my computer. Yet, I am looking forward for another firmware update which can improve this further.

i tried it again with 24-105L, and in advance mode(default mode) hunting is bad...it does tele zoom setting shown in display, in the very centre is a new focus area, when and if it gets in focus. went into green mode, and autofocus is back. advance mode, at least in my setup, is useless. sorry metabones.

Would not be surprised if Canon gives some funding for this sort of thing, helps sales or not user selling their EF lens. Besides Sony does not make great affordable lens - so win-win for Canon lens owners - traitors they may be using a Sony cam !!! ;)

I have a A7Rii which I actually don't use often enough. At this time, I am using it mainly with my Canon lenses. With the new firmware installed, I have tried most of my Canon lenses with the following experience.

1> Lenses that work, some lenses may need 2 AF cycle to obtain accurate focus, but it works.

Canon lens division loves this, body division hates it. Sony? Probably absolute hate in their eyes - the closer the adapters come to 'native' behavior, the less lenses Sony will sell (and yes, those expensive ones everyone is talking about). On the other hand - perhaps that is the plan..... Agree users win here but I reckon Canon users in particular: they no longer need to wait Canon delivers either mirrorless body or sensor if this combo works...

I do not know who is winning here. The performance I read about with these adapters is mostly "not for critical work". The seem like they are perpetually almost there. Sony would best off expanding their lens lineup. They have made a splash with their bodies but the lenses are limited. All manufacturers would prefer native equipment, so I think this middle of the road adapter performance is kind of baked in forever.

Great! Now people can again download and install and upgrade and publish test pictures of their cats and their keyboards instead of just taking pictures. I got the A6000 and the Metabones early on. There has been very little use for the combo as I like autofocus like it works on Canon 5DIII and native lenses and not something that drills back and forth and kills your battery.Let's wait for the next version and some reviews.

It won't work well with the A6000 because the A6000 hasn't been updated to do phase detect with Sony DSLR lenses and the LA-EA3 adapter. The metabones copies the LA-EA3 so if you use it on a camera that works well with LA-EA3 you get much better results.

If you use a Canon lens and metabones on an A7RII, A7II or A6300 it works very well.

Thank you. Now I know why it does not work. What bugs me is that the reviews at the time when I bought it were all in the seventh heaven because of the autofocusing abilities of this combo. I did not realize that they were actually being...you know, the opposite of honest.I do not see myself buying any more Sony products in the future.

The color argument against that particular sensor is 100% without merit.

Dpreview: "Colors are generally pleasing, and well saturated, relative to high-end DSLR offerings from Canon and Nikon. Importantly, skintones are quite pleasing, striking a balance between the more magenta-shifted Nikon and yellow-shifted Canon - even in low light, where warmth is maintained rather than being over-corrected."

@ suave . What on earth do you mean? have you ever tried correcting a horrible reddish skin tone from a Sony camera or cyan sky from a Canon camera? Not all cameras are equal. Compare a great natural skin tone from a fujifilm camera to a sony body.

Well, you make a profile that pleases you and then you apply it to your Sony photos on Lightroom for instance. For me (not a pro) it took a while but finally I get pretty much identical colors from the A6000 and the 5DIII.

Right for the Japanese is not the same as right for the Europeans or the right for Americans. I have been living in the tropic now for fifteen years and my Nordic friends say that my colors are way off and too sweet. I do not think so. I think theirs are blue gray and dull.Tastes differ.

Photograph a colorchecker passport in good fairly neutral light, export a DNG, run the colorchecker program on the DNG, it makes a camera profile. I've got ACR/lightroom defaulting to this profile and right now, my Canon blue skies look great.

But say they didn't. So... you just open that DNG in adobe camera raw or LR, with the profile applied, hold the actual passport in front of you it to the onscreen colors. Then make a few tweaks (e.g. blues a bit more towards purple) and save those as your new ACR defaults.

Once you have that profile and those defaults set, every image opens with my preferred colors and it takes no extra clicks to make them look perfect.

Sorry guys if I offended you regarding your endless desire to mix and match. To me it's a bit like a "low rider", they butcher up a car to modify it beyond it's original design for their own amusement. Hey, it's a free country, knock yourselves out as it's your $$$ that supports their mechanical experimentation's.

@armandino - we're finding video constantly hunting back and forth, with constant minute microadjustments that kill the sound feed and make out-of-focus bokeh/highlights constantly pulse. Not finding it very useful... you are though?

I think the PDAF system needs to be 'damped' with DSLR lenses. Sony native lenses don't 'pulsate' back and forth like this, yet I've noticed this constant pulsing with both the Metabones adapter and Sigma adapter in these native emulation modes. Makes for very 'jumpy' - and therefore inaccurate - AF.

@Rishi - that's partly due to AF motor architecture. Even Canon themselves say STM is more optimized for video - did you try any STM lenses?

USM, especially older USM motors, seem to have issues as far as commanding them to run at lower speed. Ability to command a lens to run at reduced speed is critical to native lens operation - http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/56692298 shows what happens when you don't. The Metabones IV definitely commands SOME slowdown that isn't done by the Techart, but not enough (potentially because it's not possible?)

I keep on getting tempted to get an EOS M3 so I can do relative comparisons - I would expect that Canon lenses which work well on the M3 or any other HCAF III/DPAF body are more likely to work well with the Metabones.

Nearly all of Sony's lenses are linear electromagnetic motors or, worst case, leadscrew-type STM like some of Leica's lenses and some Canon STMs.

I used passport checker a few times but I don't waste my time with it. It's not only the colors but the overall feeling or ambiance of the photo that turns me off. This cannot be corrected with a profile. It's the same like fuji files, not everyone likes the texture of the photo and sometimes it looks cartoonish compared to photos taken by canons.

@Rishi my answer is long and may be split over several replies. Every major mirrorless system supports legacy DSLR lenses in some form. Panasonic and Olympus take Four Thirds DSLR lenses, Sony takes A mount lenses, and Canon EOS M has full support for EF glass. Mirrorless lenses have extra synchronization signals on the mount interface to choreograph focus movements in tandem with sensor readout. DSLR lenses do not have such lens interface signals, therefore two different sets of focus commands drive true mirror lenses and DSLR lenses respectively. It is up to the camera manufacturer to determine the feature set of each type of lenses. Olympus and Sony decided not to have continuous video AF for Four Thirds lenses and A mount lenses respectively (unless you use the translucent-mirror-equipped LA-EA4), even though in principle there are no technical obstacles. Metabones MFT on Olympus and Metabones Green mode on Sony inherit the same limitations.

Sony's own LA-EA3 with Sony's own A-mount lenses take seconds to single-AF during video capture (even on A7RII), and I have yet to hear anyone getting thrilled with that kind of speed. The reason, in addition to the lack of sensor readout synchronization on the lens interface I mentioned before, is the fundamentally different design objectives between a DSLR lens and a mirrorless lens. A DSLR lens' job is to move from point A to point B in the shortest possible time, because the PDAF sensor will tell the focus motor which direction to move and exactly how much. Mirrorless AF is more like a choreographed dance, where absolute speed is not the prime concern, but sensor readout and focus motor operate in lock step with very low latency.A7RII, A7II, A6300 and Olympus E-M1 were specifically engineered to AF quickly with DSLR lenses using PDAF, but unfortunately their respective manufacturers decided not to support the full feature set, for instance no Eye AF and slow video AF for Sony.

Enter Canon. Canon is special being the only one video-focusing DSLR lenses (and I am not talking about native lenses here) with great performance using dual-pixel AF technology. No other camera manufacturer is able to achieve this feat yet, and I suspect that it is more because they lack the will rather than the ability to do so.An adapter is a ring with a hole in it. It does not have any sensors or any focus motors. So what can it do? The easy route is for an adapter to implement the DSLR command set that already exists in the mirrorless camera, aka the "Green" mode. The result is highly similar to Sony's own LA-EA3, with the feature set, performance and capabilities _decided by the camera manufacturer_.The difficult route for the manufacturer to do is to emulate a "native" lens. Owing to the lack of synchronization and the fundamentally different design objective and motor architecture, "native" lens emulation is a lofty goal that is never 100% achievable.

We will never see the original EF 300/2.8L USM lens from 1987 to become a native FE lens. It is simply unrealistic for anyone to have that expectation. The construction, technology, design priorities and end uses were totally different between now and then. Any claim of "native" emulation is only on a "best-effort" basis, where the lower of the performance (especially command execution latency) of the lens and the camera sets the upper ceiling and the ability for the adapter to recreate the missing synchronization signal deciding how close we may get to that ceiling.

Correction: none of the EOS M cameras have dual pixel AF. So Rishi must have been referring to a Canon lens on a Canon DSLR, with no adapters involved. If DSLRs are included in our consideration, Sony SLT cameras have great video AF, too.But it is up to the camera manufacturer to work on AF performance. Canon decided DSLR lenses should video-AF with great performance with the mirror up and no translucent help. None of the other camera manufacturers have that kind of determination.

The adapter limbo is this: report to the camera that you are a DSLR lens on an adapter, and the camera body cripples the features (no Eye-AF, no DMF, slow steppy 5-second CDAF for video even on A7RII). Masquerade as a "native" lens, and the camera sends an endless stream of fine tuning commands that the DSLR lens in question did not have low enough latency to execute. (It can execute one big focus move at great speed, but not 100 tiny moves.)

Bo-Ming - I believe the EOS M3 has "limited" OSPDAF with Hybrid CMOS AF III. I can't find the link right now, but someone had a slide with a Canon presentation on it. It seems that the PDAF sites were similar/identical in architecture to dual-pixel sensors - but instead of EVERY site on the sensor, it was only some sites. Kind of similar to how Sony OSPDAF is only at certain sensor sites.

@Rishi - it's unreasonable to compare the dual-pixel AF bodies, since those have PDAF sites at EVERY single pixel. Also, they have full sensitivity at each site. IIRC, many other OSPDAF solutions (I believe Fuji's was documented somewhere) involve using pairs of sites, with half of each site masked off behind the microlens. Sony is notoriously quiet about how they do it. Either way, we don't have PDAF sensors at EVERY site. This probably allows Canon to do noise-averaging across multiple sites to get additional precision from a pure-PDAF system.

It would be a more interesting comparison to evaluate various lenses on one of the Hybrid CMOS AF III bodies such as the EOS M3 - these appear to be closer in architecture to Sony's hybrid AF solution (Limited number of PDAF sites used to provide an initial rough-in for a final CDAF execution). I would expect the performance of an EOS M3 with a given lens to be an indicator of a rough upper limit of performance of what most Canon lenses can do on a Sony - with STM lenses being at a clear advantage here.

Overall 0.50 is a MAJOR step forward, especially for those who don't own a very limited set of one of only three E-mount bodies (A7II/A7RII/A6300) - it clearly still has some work to be done, but honestly, you can't achieve something like this in one shot, and unlike Techart, Metabones actually evaluates feedback. (I recall a discussion over in the Adapted Lens Talk forum that was hinting at a possible area that could be improved for example.)

@Entropy512 EOS M3 does have OSPDAF and it has great video AF with EF lenses, but that was a deliberate effort on Canon's part to give full DSLR lens support to their mirrorless system, a commitment that was not shared by Sony with their A-mount or Panasonic/Olympus with their classic Four Thirds DSLR mount. It is a question of will rather than ability, but the ball is firmly in the park of the manufacturer of the camera body and the adapter can do little if anything here.

Useful to know - while in theory the systems probably have similar architecture on the sensor itself, Canon likely designed the body side to be more "tolerant" of their existing SLR lens designs - while Sony on the other hand started from a clean slate. For example the Sony 60 Hz command loop could be limiting with some lens architectures. It's telling that most Sony lenses are LEMs, with ring USM fairly rare (and in the case of the 70-200GM, it's a combo of both ring USM and LEM if I recall correctly).

I'd be curious to see how often an M3 issues commands to the lens - but I'm not exactly keen on buying an M3 just to RE it. :) The more often the body polls/commands the lens, the less predictability between updates is needed. Sony's E-mount protocols have a pretty hard 60 Hz update rate.

Of course much of this is just educated guessing on my part, you're way ahead of me here. :)

Tested a few on the original A7, it's a seriously big improvement. Actually very usable compared to the old, useless adapted CDAF. There are caveats, but this makes my A7 (which hasn't been used in months) a very viable second camera.

As a point of reference, A7 with this + Canon 85/1.8 seems to focus about as fast as my NX1 with native 85/1.4. While that combo is not blazing because the AF of that lens is essentially the same as Canon lenses in design, the AF of the NX1 is supposed to be vastly superior to the dinky old A7.

AF-C is far worse on an a7R II because PDAF becomes limited to a tiny central region. In the 'Green' mode, you have PDAF over a far larger region.

AF-S is also worse because you, again, lose PDAF over most of the frame, only getting it in a small central region.

Even within that small central region where you have PDAF, PDAF is pretty inconsistent with all the lenses we tested, reverting to hunting quite often, and refusing to focus altogether on subjects far away.

If AF-C is terribly outside of the PDAF area, why are you suggesting AF-S is any better? If it's CDAF outside of the central area for AF-S, how is that any better than prior to the firmware update?

It's not. Apart from eye subject recognition. Big deal.

We stick to our initial assessment: most users should not even bother trying this update. It's wonderful in principle, but in practice it just doesn't work.

The basis of your assessment is the apparently smaller PDAF area. My answer to that is down a few comments in @Adam Palmer's thread, which I am not going to repeat here.

You did make a useful observation with your test case where even within the central region PDAF hunts excessively and refuses to focus on subjects far away. I bet that didn't happen with your 70-200/2.8L IS II USM (because it was an officially sanctioned lens), but with some of your f/1.4 lenses, none of which were on the officially sanctioned list?

"At this point, with these lenses, we find this update largely useless, and found ourselves reverting to the 'Green' mode that was default prior to this update for best performance".. what is 'Green' mode?

I recently bought a MkIV adapter to use with a Sigma 12-24mm F4.5-5.6 DG HSM II Canon Mount with my Sony a7RII. The adapter was almost as expensive as the lens and basically never finds focus.. as in, NEVER! What a waste of money and rip-off. Unfortunately for a job that I am doing, this Sigma is the only lens that is practical for me to use (or the Canon 11-24mm that would have cost 5 times more)..

I'm taking pictures in Hong Kong for a government architectural project on recovering some old classic buildings and structures. Because the spaces all vary in size and most are extremely small, unless I take several different Ultra wide primes (and there are very few available anyway) it's difficult for me to have a fast workflow. But the Sigma 12-24mm allows me a very fast shooting schedule and great image quality. I'm using tripod on all shots and can handle low-light stopping the lens to F8. At F8 the Sigma is amazingly good, at least my sample, including corners. But trying to autofocus with the Metabones Adapter with few available light, is basically impossible. Doesn't catch focus on anything. I'm doing manual focus.. is fine and focus peaking helps. Mind you that I'm NOT running today's latest firmware yet because I hear mix reports. Either way I don't think the new firmware in any way would improve my particular shooting issues. I'm always just on center point only, AF-S.

... and none of them work anywhere near as well as native FE glass, so it's still really not ideal. If you're just a casual shooter, though, sure, this might satisfy your needs. Then again, if you're a casual shooter, I'm not sure why you'd be buying a $400 adapter...

As much as I enjoyed top Canon, Nikon and Sigma lenses on their native products back in the day, I have NO interest in NON native lenses on my A7RII. It all works far too well, and the lenses I use are far too good to compete with. Sadly many are born tinkerers.

Sadly ? Really ? What ridiculous pontification. The concept of adapting third party lenses has lead to technical improvement, competition between brands etc. Personally, I am not interested, but the idea of referring to it as 'sad', is, well, sad.

I'll add to the list of people who jumped on this and kind of wished I didn't. Limits you to just the middle PDAF points. I was able to switch the adapter to automatically load to old system.

This is the method from the metabones website.

Changing the default mode permanently

With no lens attached, turn on camera body.

While holding down the WO/CF button on the adapter, attach lens.

Without ever releasing the WO/CF button, switch off the camera's power.

Repeat to restore the default mode to Advanced mode again. With Mark I, Mark II, Mark III and the original Speed Booster, you may make the switch for only about 10 times. After that you can only make temporary mode changes. A firmware update will fully restore the capability to permanently change the default mode. There is no restriction on default mode changes with Mark IV and Speed Booster ULTRA.

Here is another data point for you to consider: the original Metabones "Green" mode PDAF was known to not work well with off-center AF points. So I chose a corner point with a 50 STM on A7RII. Rack back-and-forth it did, but lock it didn't.

Switch over to the new AF algorithm - the same corner AF point locked every time, both AF-S and AF-C. In AF-C I was surprised to find that even though it was slow and racked back-and-forth a lot, when I tripped the shutter the result was accurate (with priority set in AF-C "balanced emphasis", so the "AF" setting can only be better). If we follow the recommendation and stick with AF-S, it was way faster.

So don't let the small square in the middle fool you! the corner AF point was working better than before. You are recommending people to not even try based on the misleading center square, when it is actually working if you ignore that square.

? Off-center points don't even offer PDAF at all with the new firmware. Whereas previously they did, though some lenses with severe focus breathing didn't function well with small off-center points (image probably moved too much during the hint).

So this update is a significant step backward for the a7R II. I'm unclear why you're suggesting otherwise.

That's exactly where we differ, but think about this: why would anyone prefer advertised PDAF points that in reality never lock with certain lenses over CDAF points that are actually working dependably? I would suggest you to focus less on paper specs and more on the real world.

A similar point can be made of long telephoto performance (which you did not test). It was another well-known gripe that it used to work only under the most ideal conditions. Now with the new method, it is slower, but locks under a wider range of conditions. You have only had a cursory look at the new stuff and wrote it off based on its lower performance and its inability to AF-C. I would say you simply did not test it enough and jumped to your conclusion prematurely. The new method, if you stick with AF-S that is, is more robust than before, and that alone merits a closer look.

The update is not for the A7RII alone. It is for AltaCine F5, Blackmagic, JVC GY-LS300, Panasonic, Olympus (especially with the E-M1 getting faster PDAF), and last but not least, the non-PDAF cameras, the most important of which includes the A7SII. Why would you ask everyone to not install it based on your assessment with A7RII?

Rishi, I do appreciate you asking a very basic and legitimate question. "What is in it for me? (If I use A7RII)" I would say, more features, more robustness with edge AF points and long telephotos, ability to visually verify focus accuracy very quickly by using DMF in conjunction with focus peaking, and I can go on and on. If you can't live with the new limitations that unfortunately come with these new benefits, the old behaviour is just a button press away. Now tell me, what do you lose installing it and what is the point of not installing it? Is it the cost of 14 megabytes of bandwidth and 30 seconds of update time?

IMO your (Rishi's) assessment of "useless" might be a little too harsh. First, you did not have any new findings not already noted in the "limitations" list. Second, if anything the update is immensely useful for A6000, A7S(II) and the original A7R owners, not to mention cinematographers would appreciate smooth iris.

I disagree. Sure I had some findings not already noted in the limitations list - like that PDAF only works in tiny central region, which actually makes it worse than 'Green' mode, where PDAF tends to work across the entire, massive phase-detect area.

This holds true even for the officially supported lenses.

Furthermore, I tried the adapter on the a6000 in this mode. While, yes, technically it enables PDAF with some lenses on the a6000 (which the Green mode doesn't), it's so unreliable as to be largely, well, useless. Focus only locks on 1 out of 4 or 5 attempts, can't focus on far away objects, and, again, only a small central region works. It's barely better than just CDAF in 'Green' mode.

I understand this must be a very technically difficult thing to do. I guess emulating a Sony adapter is a better way to go at the moment for DSLR lenses than emulating a native lens (judging from the performance of this firmware update, & of the Sigma adapter, which fares better actually).

"It really doesn't work well at all. Kind of useless, sorry to report. Just updated the story."

Hey Rishi, I just tested a small assortment of lenses and while they all had quite different results, they all definitely use PDAF outside of that little square, I think that is an issue with the camera, but if you ignore it it actually works fine in the whole PDAF area.

As we know AF-C is usually the way to go with these Sony bodies regardless of lens or subject. However this 'native' mode is pretty borked with AF-C (which makes sense if you think about it) but does actually seem to work rather nicely in AF-S. In some lenses I've used the AF is faster and works better than the old non-native mode using AF-C.

So it isn't entirely useless, quite useful indeed, just not a complete 'cure-all', because these are not hybrid designed lenses. Interestingly the 40mm STM kind of is and seems to work pretty well in all modes including video.

For that little I have tried so far reverting to green mode is the way to go especially in continuous focus, however it does a decent job with video in my opinion, which is really big for me not to rely exclusively to Manual focus on Canon glass.

I don't particularly find it much faster in AF-S compared to the old Green Mode AF-S, which at least maintains PDAF across the entire PDAF area.

I'm confused - what do you think this update brings that wasn't already there in the a7R II?

Sure with the original a7 and a6000 it brings some PDAF to the central focusing points, but it's so unreliable (hunting, doesn't focus on far away subjects) that I'd again rather just use the original 'Green' mode.

Trust me, of all folks, I really wanted this to work, as I love Eye AF. But the reality is, it just doesn't.

@Rishi Sanyal I agree, when I read the news I was all over it. Disappointing, but possibly a step closer? For me the only benefit is AF on video mode with Canon glass wish is still extremely useful for when I run around with a steadicam.

The press release made it clear that AF-C might have unsatisfactory performance, and even gave an explanation of where the bottleneck was, yet it is still panned and dismissed for AF-C. In fact I suspect most if not all the naysayers are using AF-C. There is always the good old "Green" mode for AF-C. I have yet to hear anyone using AF-S having any serious complaints about this firmware.

The A7RII, A7II and A6300 were engineered specifically to autofocus quickly with DSLR lenses. With the exception of long teles, performance is already on par with a genuine Canon, because it is already as quickly as the maximum speed the focus motor is capable of physically, so why would anyone expect any further improvement? Again, the press release already self-flagellated about performance and/or accuracy being lower than the original PDAF. Notwithstanding that, the new AF did work better with long teles because they now hunt less, yet you didn't have any of that in your test suite.

@armandino Are we overly thrilled with the prospect of any lens from 1987 onwards working just like the latest native mirrorless lens? True, the heading might have hinted at that, but if you read the contents without selectively ignoring what you didn't want to hear, we have to come back down to Earth and work within the limitations. This is in fact "useless" when you stretch it beyond its design parameters, but if you are willing to work within it, a lot of people have found it useful. And like what you have found, video AF is good to have, provided you have the proper external mic to avoid motor noise. So, you are not coming home empty-handed.

I think it might come down to how good the AF on sony bodies is in the first place? It seems sony has better / more reliable AF with A6000 series bodies than it is with A7 bodies? You can shoot action photography with Axxxx series, but with A7 the results are drastically poorer.

Anyone looking to use a long canon telelens will benefit from use of sony's APS-C bodies with this adapter.

AF-C already worked well with the old firmware across most of the frame for most lenses. It's crippled in the new firmware, only working in the center, and even there poorly.

AF-S also worked well, and now works worse because PDAF points are only available centrally. So even AF-S got worse.

About the only benefit I can think of is Eye AF without PDAF in AF-S (too much hunting in AF-C to be usable). That's hardly a benefit- you could just stick to the old firmware and use face detection or a single point and have it focus much faster because at least it'd be using PDAF.

So, again, what do you think the advantage of the update is for a7R II or a7 II or a6300 users?

It was nice in principle, and hopefully it'll improve, but in its current form, it's not an upgrade at all for most users.

That was not true. It was a well-known gripe that in the past the edge and corner PDAF points were hit-and-miss, and lens breathing was suspected as the culprit.

While the same is true for the new AF method, it falls back to CDAF gracefully and locks anywhere across the frame.

The new stuff is slower, but more robust, provided that you are willing to stick with AF-S as per the press release's recommendation.

Which makes me wonder about the merit of your "discovery" that PDAF is limited to the center portion. The edge and corner PDAF points never really worked dependably, and the smaller square you now see in the finder simply reflected reality more closely. The real cause of poor results from your test is the use of AF-C alone, and you blew it out of proportions. If you are willing to listen to the manufacturer and at least try not using AF-C, you could have arrived at a very different conclusion.

Don't know about the fotodiox, doubt it. MB however seems to work with every lens I've tried on it to date, including some quite old lenses such as 20-35/3.5-4.5, 35/2, 85/1.8 and Tamron 90/2.8 (the old one). Works pretty well and the 85mm works best with this new native mode.

Canon's first video-recording DSLR, 5D mark II, was released in 2008, and as the cliché says, the rest is history. But Canon realized the lenses' irises were unfit for video work. From that point onwards, all new lens designs came with smooth iris. In pretty much the same way distance information was added to lenses in the 90's, Canon didn't advertise this new feature or talk much about it. As far as I can tell every Canon lens launched in 2009 and after has it. Canon laid the groundwork, but it is Sony who had a great line of cameras making use of this. (A7SII, FS5, FS7, FS700, A6300, A7RII et al.)

I always figured there were some "hidden" features that Canon added to lenses for added cine compatibility over time, thanks for highlighting one of them.

Also I've observed that newer motors (such as the STMs) definitely play more nicely with mirrorless bodies.

I'm now curious to throw the MBIV and MC-11 on my logic analyzer with the 17-70C to see what the differences are. I've always been curious what causes Sony bodies to drop into "center PDAF" mode with the Sigma DN trio, now I've got another example. I'm guessing some sort of calibration data is missing, and this would be difficult/impossible to do generically as it likely requires a good lens profile.

As I understand it, Metabones had this for a while in their pocket, but since it DOES have limitations, chose to hold it back.

Since so many Metabones customers are using A7xII and 6300 bodies, I'm wondering if perhaps Metabones should have left the default at "green" mode until more people had beaten on the new algorithm in the field. The update seems great so far other than that one issue.

In addition to the MBIV being the only adapter I've used to allow the 85/1.8 to AF with the A6300 in adapted-lens PDAF mode, it worked quite well in native mode too. The only lens I've had behave very badly with native mode is the Tamron 70-300SP.

Unambiguously superior to the Techart III, which is a 100% failure in both native (Fn) and adapted-emulation (Nor) modes.

That's strange - A6000 and A6300 are indistinguishable when the adapter is in "advanced mode" in my experience, and as I said - the 85/1.8 USM DOES work fairly well in "advanced" mode on A6300. I haven't actually thrown it on my A6000 but based on experience with other lenses, I don't expect any difference in "advanced" mode.

It's well known that only canon lenses designed after 2006 work well with adapters and sony's AF system. Canon had some kind of change that took place in 2006. The 135 F2 was released in 1996, it's an old design.

The DC-motor lenses (old 35/2, 50/1.8s, 24/2.8, old 18-55s, 18-135s and 18-200 at least) should be avoided at all costs anyway.

As for the 85/1.8, 50/1.4, 28/1.8, and 20/2.8 (all having USM), one would hope that they get refreshes that exceed the quality of the 24/28/35 IS USM triplet. I have the 24 and 35 IS lenses which are excellent, and with the 80D reportedly have very smooth focus transitions even with their USM motors. More of that would be nice, most especially since Tamron's new stabilized primes leave performance on the table!

Latest in-depth reviews

Canon's EOS R, the company's first full-frame mirrorless camera, impresses us with its image quality and color rendition. But it also comes with quirky ergonomics, uninspiring video features and a number of other shortcomings. Read our full review to see how the EOS R stacks up in today's full-frame mirrorless market.

No Nikon camera we've tested to date balances stills and video capture as well as the Nikon Z7. Though autofocus is less reliable than the D850, Nikon's first full-frame mirrorless gets enough right to earn our recommendation.

Nikon's Coolpix P1000 has moved the zoom needle from 'absurd' to 'ludicrous,' with an equivalent focal length of 24-3000mm. While it's great for lunar and still wildlife photography, we found that it's not suited for much else.

The Nikon Z7 is slated as a mirrorless equivalent to the D850, but it can't subject track with the same reliability as its DSLR counterpart. AF performance is otherwise good, except in low light where hunting can lead to missed shots.

Latest buying guides

What's the best camera for under $500? These entry level cameras should be easy to use, offer good image quality and easily connect with a smartphone for sharing. In this buying guide we've rounded up all the current interchangeable lens cameras costing less than $500 and recommended the best.

Whether you've grown tired of what came with your DSLR, or want to start photographing different subjects, a new lens is probably in order. We've selected our favorite lenses for Sony mirrorlses cameras in several categories to make your decisions easier.

Whether you've grown tired of what came with your DSLR, or want to start photographing different subjects, a new lens is probably in order. We've selected our favorite lenses for Canon DSLRs in several categories to make your decisions easier.

Whether you've grown tired of what came with your DSLR, or want to start photographing different subjects, a new lens is probably in order. We've selected our favorite lenses for Nikon DSLRs in several categories to make your decisions easier.

What’s the best camera for less than $1000? The best cameras for under $1000 should have good ergonomics and controls, great image quality and be capture high-quality video. In this buying guide we’ve rounded up all the current interchangeable lens cameras costing under $1000 and recommended the best.

Canon's EOS R, the company's first full-frame mirrorless camera, impresses us with its image quality and color rendition. But it also comes with quirky ergonomics, uninspiring video features and a number of other shortcomings. Read our full review to see how the EOS R stacks up in today's full-frame mirrorless market.

We spoke to wildfire photographer Stuart Palley about his experiences shooting the recent Woolsey fire, why the Nikon Z7 isn't quite ready to take a permanent spot in his gear bag, and 'that' Tweet from Donald Trump.

The Z7 presented Nikon with a stiff challenge: how to build a mirrorless camera that measures up to its own DSLRs and can deliver a familiar experience to Nikon users. Chris and Jordan tell us whether they think Nikon succeeded.

Nikon has released firmware version 1.02 that resolves a flickering issue when scrolling through images, an ISO limitation problem, and an occasional crash that could occur when displaying certain Raw files.

The Insta360 One X is the company's latest consumer 360-degree camera, supporting 5.7K video, including excellent image stabilization, as well as 18MP photos. And, in our experience, it's a really fun camera to use.